When the political party The New Movement was launched in November 2019 it described itself as a non-traditional political organisation. It turns out it is not so non-traditional after all if the actions of its parliamentary representative, Dr Asha Kissoon, are anything to go by. It exemplifies the same old clinging to power in defiance of ethical requirements that the electorate is all too familiar with. The only difference is that this time it is occurring on a minuscule scale, numerically speaking, since it takes the form of Dr Kissoon who represents all of 244 voters refusing to give up a parliamentary seat to which she has had no moral entitlement since last November. So much for what’s ‘new’ in Guyanese politics.
That she was there at all was a consequence of a never before used provision in the Representation of the People Act dating back to 1963. Under the constitution a coalition cannot be formed after an election has taken place; it has to be set up before an election. This is an impediment which the PPP in particular has never wanted removed, given its experience in the 1964 election when the PNC and United Force formed a coalition to deny it office.
However, it is possible under the Representation of the People Act for parties to contest an election on an individual basis, but for their votes to be combined when it comes to the allocation of seats. For this to happen the Representative and Deputy Representative of each list must give notice in writing to the Chief Election Officer no later than the 25th day before election day. It was Mr Ralph Ramkarran of ANUG who drew attention to this provision prior to the 2020 election, and in conformity with it, three parties later announced a joinder: ANUG, the Liberty and Justice Party and Dr Kissoon’s TNM. With their votes combined they won one seat in Parliament.
The first two parties won the bulk of the votes – more than 2200 each – and all three agreed that Mr Lenox Shuman, the leader of the LJP should occupy the seat first, followed by ANUG and then TNM. After his accession to the House he was voted the Deputy Speaker, a post which normally would be expected to go to the major opposition, holding 31 seats. But the PPP/C together with his own vote, used its majority to give him the post.
After two-and-a-half years Mr Shuman submitted his parliamentary resignation in accordance with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding between the three parties. It was expected that he would be succeeded by a representative of ANUG, but that party acceded to a change of arrangements allowing the TNM to follow him instead. A statement from ANUG last Saturday explained that since the TNM had only been allocated a few months, it was “at risk of being kept out of Parliament altogether, in the event that an early election was called in 2025.”
Dr Kissoon did enter the National Assembly as arranged, and like her predecessor Mr Shuman, became the Deputy Speaker. It was when her time to demit came that a problem arose. Dr Kissoon did not, and still does not, want to relinquish the seat. The representative from ANUG who should be there, Althia King, told the media that TNM’s time in the House had already expired when Parliament went into recess on August 10th last year. The party nevertheless decided to wait until sittings resumed in October before proceeding with the resignation process, which initially was set for November. However, owing to the fact that Dr Kissoon fell sick, an agreement could not be reached.
Ms King went on to say that they communicated with the TNM parliamentary representative via email asking if they could be sent a copy of the resignation letter so they could start the process. “We waited and we waited,” she said, and then they learnt that the resignation had been sent to Parliament, something they confirmed in January this year. In February, however, they were told it had been rescinded.
In a statement ANUG said that Dr Kissoon had made a “single verbal and informal promise to vacate office on 29th February, 2024, three months late,” but that that assurance had also been breached. She clearly has a pathological problem with keeping her word – not a recommendation for any politician.
So what, exactly, does Dr Kissoon think she is doing? “For the past fifty-five years, the country has been led by political parties who divided the land with racism, encouraged nepotism and thrived on an oligarchy system riddled with corruption at the highest office …” said the TNM website in the heady pre-election days. So is Dr Kissoon acting with the concurrence of her party? What do other members of the executive have to say about her actions? Have they too abandoned their principles? Or is it that the party has long since vanished into political oblivion, and she is the sole survivor answerable to no one but herself?
It is not as if Dr Kissoon has been particularly voluble on the subject of her motives. She has repeated ‘no comment’ to our reporters, on the last occasion interrupting an enquiry with “I will save you a lot of time. I have no official comments right now.” Well she should have some official comments; she is occupying a seat in the country’s law-making forum which even if she were not there on an unauthorised basis still requires her to be answerable to the public.
Ruminating on the matter of her motivation, ANUG General Secretary Timothy Jonas pointed out that with only 32 seats the opposition has no say in Parliament; “The government has the 33rd seat …” Since it cannot be that holding on to this seat gives Ms Kissoon any real power, “what is it that persuades an intelligent person to expose their true character …?” he asked. It can only be remarked that power comes in many forms: she might be consumed by the buzz of politics, and then too she is the Deputy Speaker, giving her perhaps a sense of importance. In addition, as a member of the parliamentary opposition she will meet foreign dignitaries, as she did the Americans recently along with the leaders of APNU and the AFC.
Whatever the case, Mr Jonas’s emphasis on the need for transparency and accountability in politics cannot be denied. We have had decades of politicians obsessed with self-aggrandisement, and we hardly need any more, particularly if they hypocritically present themselves as offering a new approach. An ANUG statement rightly described Dr Kissoon as “an imposter in possession of the seat as a Member of Parliament against the will of the electorate as a result of her breach of trust.”
Most important, it adverted to the “further undermining [of] the confidence of the Guyanese people in third parties” which her behaviour represented. The AFC under the coalition dealt a body blow to third parties, and as the results of the 2020 elections showed, that confidence will not be restored in a hurry. Dr Kissoon masqueraded as representing a third party approach, but she has now been unmasked. What other new party will be trusted after this? She is not only guilty of breach of trust, but also of damaging the longer-term political options in a fundamental way.
Mr Shuman aptly described her failure to vacate the seat as “dishonourable.” It is unfortunate that other than censure, there is no mechanism by which the offender can be induced to do the right thing, and treat the voters of Guyana and by extension the democratic process with respect. Under the Constitution an MP can only be removed from Parliament if he or she is taken off the list by a party’s Representative of the List, or if they resign. In the current situation where the agreement was based on good faith on the part the parties involved, there will be no legal recourse. While her actions are immoral, therefore, they are technically not illegal.
A few years ago Dr Kissoon said that the symbol of her party was an eagle, which illustrated the vision of what the party could do for Guyana. Under her leadership the eagle has been doing no soaring; it is stuck in the mud.
